7/31/2019 Torture Tools European Union
1/50
NO MOREDELAYS
PUTTING AN END TO THE
EU TRADE IN TOOLS OF
TORTURE
7/31/2019 Torture Tools European Union
2/50
2
Amnesty International Publications
First published in 2012 by
Amnesty International Publications
International Secretariat
Peter Benenson House1 Easton Street
London WC1X 0DW
United Kingdom
www.amnesty.org
Amnesty International Publications 2012
Index: ACT 30/062/2012
Original Language: English
Printed by Amnesty International, International Secretariat, United Kingdom
All rights reserved. This publication is copyright, but may be reproduced by any
method without fee for advocacy, campaigning and teaching purposes, but not
for resale. The copyright holders request that all such use be registered with
them for impact assessment purposes. For copying in any other circumstances,
or for reuse in other publications, or for translation or adaptation, prior written
permission must be obtained from the publishers, and a fee may be payable.
To request permission, or for any other inquiries, please contact
Amnesty International is a global movement of more than
3 million supporters, members and activists in more than 150
countries and territories who campaign to end grave abuses
of human rights.
Our vision is for every person to enjoy all the rights enshrined
in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and other
international human rights standards.
We are independent of any government, political ideology,
economic interest or religion and are funded mainly by our
membership and public donations.
7/31/2019 Torture Tools European Union
3/50
3
CONTENTSContents ......................................................................................................................3
Executive Summary.......................................................................................................5
1.Introduction ..............................................................................................................7
2.Key challenges regarding prohibited and controlled equipment .......................................9
2.1 ELECTRIC-SHOCK BELTS....................................................................................9
2.2 Electric-shock cuffs and other electric-shock devices attached to the human body....13
2.3 Spiked batons and spiked shields........................................................................17
2.4 Thumb-cuffs, finger-cuffs and thumb-screws ........................................................19
2. 5 Leg irons, chains and shackles...........................................................................20
2.6 Restraint chairs.................................................................................................22
2.7 Pharmaceutical chemicals used in capital punishment ..........................................24
3. Introduction of a torture and death penalty end use catch all safety clause ................27
4. controls on Brokering activities.................................................................................28
5.Promotion of Regulation equipment at EU trade fairs and exhibitions ............................31
6.Reporting on Licensing Activity .................................................................................35
END NOTES...............................................................................................................40
7/31/2019 Torture Tools European Union
4/50
4
7/31/2019 Torture Tools European Union
5/50
5
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
This report presents findings by Amnesty International and the Omega Research Foundation
(Omega) from their on-going assessment of the efficacy and implementation of Council
Regulation (EC) No 1236/2005 of 27 June 2005concerning trade in certain goods which
could be used for capital punishment, torture or other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment
or punishment(the Regulation). The report includes new evidence that companies operating
in a number of Member States have marketed or promoted equipment that is prohibited
under the Regulation. Other companies have traded in equipment which although not
currently prohibited by the Regulation can be readily used to facilitate torture or ill-
treatment, and should either be banned or stringently controlled forthwith.
On the 16th November 2011 representatives of Amnesty International and Omega presented
their joint findings to the Committee on Common Rules for Exports of Products (the
Committee), which reports to the European Commission. On 20th December 2011, following
a formal review of the Regulation and its implementation, the Commission introduced
binding measures1 strengthening the Regulations controls in three areas that had previously
been highlighted by Amnesty International and Omega, thereby:
1. 1Extending the existing prohibition in the Regulation on electric-shock belts to coverstun-cuffs , stun sleeves and any other electric-shock devices which are intended to be
worn on the body by a restrained individual. All such items are now included in the list of
prohibited items (Annex II (2, 2.1)).
2. Adding spiked batons, to Annex II of the Regulation, and thereby prohibiting their importand export (Annex II (3)).
3. Extending the scope of Annex III of the Regulation to include, and thereby controllingthe export of, certain drugs which could be used for the execution of human beings, such as
sodium thiopental and pentobarbital (Annex III (4)).
Amnesty International and Omega welcome these developments and call on the Commission
and EU Member States to ensure that they are fully implemented throughout the European
Union.
The Commission has also agreed to set up an expert group to assist with a wider-ranging
review of the regulation and its implementation, including possible amendment of the
Regulation itself. We therefore call on this expert group to propose that the Commission and
Member States further strengthen the Regulation and its implementation by:
1. Extending the prohibition on spiked batons to include spiked shields and any other spikeddevice designed to inflict ill-treatment.
2. Adding thumb and finger restraints purposely designed to cause discomfort or pain (such
as those with serrated edges) to the list of prohibited items (Annex II) of the Regulation.
Thumbscrews should be reclassified from the list of controlled items (Annex III) to the list
of prohibited items (Annex II).
7/31/2019 Torture Tools European Union
6/50
6
3. Reclassifying fixed leg irons, bar fetters, and any leg restraint purposely designed to cause
discomfort (such as weighted leg cuffs) from the list of controlled items (Annex III) to the list
of prohibited items (Annex II). EU Member States should ensure that other forms of leg
restraint such as chain-linked leg cuffs are not exported to end-users where there arereasonable grounds that such items might be used in torture or other ill-treatment.
4. Consider adding restraint chairs to Annex II of the Regulation so that their import and
export is prohibited.
5. Extending the scope of the Regulation to include the full range of drugs currently used in
executions including pancuronium bromide and propofol in Annex III, and thereby prohibiting
export where there is a risk that such equipment may be used for executions. In addition the
scope of the Regulation should be further extended to cover (and prohibit) the transfer of
pharmaceutical drugs intended for use in torture or cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or
punishment.
6. Introducing a torture and death penalty end-use catch-all clause to the Regulation.
7. Amend the Regulation to prohibit the promotion and marketing of goods in Annex II and
ensure that all such goods held by companies are verifiably destroyed.
8. Amend the Regulation to prohibit brokering of the transfer of Annex II listed goods and
control the brokering of Annex III goods.
Furthermore all Member States that have not done should compile public annual activity
reports in accordance with their Article 13(3) obligations. All Member States annual activity
reports should form part of a formal Regulation review process undertaken by the Committee
on Common Rules for Exports of Products.
The Commission should take a more proactive role in promoting the reporting and
transparency process: for example, by developing a model framework report to guide States in
compilation of their annual reports, and by publishing all annual reports on a dedicated
website so that parliaments and the public can exercise a reasonable degree of oversight.
7/31/2019 Torture Tools European Union
7/50
7
1.INTRODUCTIONThe prohibition on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment is
absolute. It applies in all circumstances and, as part of international customary law, to all
States.2Despite such obligations, torture is still variously perpetrated in countries in all
regions of the world, and capital punishment is still carried out in several countries. UN
independent experts, UN bodies, and non-governmental human rights organizations have
documented the trade and use of different types of equipment to commit such torture and
other ill- treatment, and to carry out capital punishment.
In 2006 the European Union (EU) introduced the world's first multilateral trade controls toprohibit the international trade in equipment which has no practical use other than for the
purposes of capital punishment, torture or other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or
punishment3; and to control the trade in a range of policing and security equipment misused
for such violations of human rights. Council Regulation (EC) No 1236/2005 of 27 June
2005 concerning trade in certain goods which could be used for capital punishment, torture
or other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment4
(the Regulation) fills a major
gap in human-rights-based export controls. It introduced unprecedented, binding trade
controls on a range of equipment which is often used in capital punishment, torture and
other ill treatment, but which has not usually been included on EU Member States' military,
dual-use or strategic export control lists.
In March 2010, Amnesty International and Omega released a report entitled From Words to
Deeds: making the EU ban on the trade in tools of torture a reality5
highlighting limitations
in crucial provisions of the Regulation and instances of variable and poor implementation of
the Regulation amongst Member States. Amnesty International and Omega have
subsequently raised these specific concerns with the European Commission and Member
States.6
In addition, the European Parliament passed a Resolution urging the Commission
and Member States to implement a range of measures to strengthen the Regulation and
ensure its full adherence.7
Growing international concern about the supply of equipment to law enforcement agencies
used in torture and other ill-treatment was also reflected on 8th
November 2011 in theUnited Nations General Assembly Third Committee. Member States took action on a draft
resolution presented by Denmark with 83 State sponsors from around the world entitled:
Torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, which, in
paragraph 24, adopted a similar approach to the EU: Calls upon all States to take
appropriate effective legislative, administrative, judicial and other measures to prevent and
prohibit the production, trade, export, importand use of equipmentthat have no practical
7/31/2019 Torture Tools European Union
8/50
8
use other than for the purpose oftorture or other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or
punishment. [Changes to the previous UNGA resolutions on this subject are shown in bold]8
On the 16th November 2011, representatives of Amnesty International and Omega presented
the organisations findings regarding their on-going assessment of the implementation of theRegulation, to the Committee on Common Rules for Exports of Products (the Committee),
which reports to the European Commission. On 20th December 2011, following a formal
review of the Regulation and its implementation, the Commission published Commission
Implementing Regulation (EU) No 1352/2011 which updated and strengthened the
Regulations controls in three areas body worn electric-shock devices, spiked batons and
pharmaceutical chemicals utilised in capital punishment.9
On 2 March 2012, the
Commission launched a call for applications to a new expert group, which will assist with a
further in-depth review of the Regulation this year. This group will also look at how to address
the outstanding issues in the 2010 Parliament resolution and whether there is a need for
legislative follow-up.
In order to facilitate the work of this expert group, the on-going work of the European
Commission, the Committee and Member States, and to inform the European Parliament,
Amnesty International and Omega have prepared this report to provide a summary of further
information on the implementation of the Regulation.
We conclude that:
The Regulation remains inadequately implemented in several EU Member States;
traders in some EU Member States offered for sale equipment which under the existing
Regulation is explicitly prohibited for import and export to and from the European Union
because it has no other practical purpose than for torture or other ill-treatment;
loopholes in the Regulation have allowed traders in EU Member States to undertake
unregulated trading activities in a range of equipment and services that has been used for
capital punishment, torture and other ill-treatment by military, security and law enforcement
personnel around the world. These loopholes were only partially addressed by the
Commissions amendments to the Regulation of the 20th December 2011.
7/31/2019 Torture Tools European Union
9/50
9
2.KEY CHALLENGES REGARDING
PROHIBITED AND CONTROLLEDEQUIPMENT
2.1 ELECTRIC-SHOCK BELTSArticle 4 of the Regulation prohibits the import or export of any item listed in Annex II, which
has no practical use other than for capital punishment, torture or other cruel, inhuman or
degrading treatment or punishment. Annex II lists, among other items:
Electric-shock belts designed for restraining human beings by the administration of electric
shocks having a no-load voltage exceeding 10 000 V.
Unlike other electric-shock devices, stun belts are intended for attachment to prisoners
bodies and worn, sometimes for hours at a time, with the constant threat that they can be
remotely activated at any moment. Prison officers can activate the belts currently marketed
by using remote control devices from up to 100 meters away. On activation, a typical
electric-shock belt delivers a shock of 50,000 volts.10
Such devices typically generate a high-
voltage pulse current that enters the prisoners body at the site of the electrodes, often near
the kidneys, and passes through the body. The shock causes incapacitation in the first few
seconds and severe pain whilst the shock is maintained. Amnesty International has argued
that the belt relies on the prisoners constant fear of severe pain being inflicted at any time
while held in a situation of powerlessness.11
Such belts have been used in the USA and
South Africa.12
Amnesty International and Omega believe that the use of such electric-shock belts is
inherently cruel, inhuman or degrading, and since 2001 have called for their manufacture,
transfer and use to be banned. In 1999, the UN Committee Against Torture recommended
that electric-shock belts should be abolish(ed) as methods of restraining those in
custody13
and in 2010, the Council of Europes Committee for the Prevention of Torture
expressed its opposition to the use of electric stun belts for controlling the movement of
detained persons, whether inside or outside places of deprivation of liberty14
(i) Marketing of electric-shock beltsAlthough the Regulation specifically bans the import and export of electric-shock belts,
research by Amnesty International and Omega indicates that these devices have been
marketed by companies based in Member States.
7/31/2019 Torture Tools European Union
10/50
10
Denmark and GermanyThe Danish company Filcotech ApS has marketed a range of security products including self-
defence equipment such as irritant sprays, alarms and electric-shock devices.15A screenshot
of the products list originally taken from the company website (below right) and which wasstill active as of 19th January 2012 shows the High Voltage Security Transit Belt. This belt
is visually similar to the Anti Scape Stun Belt produced by a South African based
manufacturer of electric-shock equipment, Force Group, which delivers a 50,000 volt shock
(below left).16
The Filcotech ApS company product list stated that, All prices are based on
FOB [free on board], Johannesburg, SA[South Africa], indicating that the belts may be of
South African origin.
Another company, Beka International based in Germany, has offered to supply a range of
police and security equipment. The Beka International website as of 26th June 2012 was
displaying an antiscape stun belt.17
Once again the belt (below centre) is visually similar to
the Anti 'Scape Stun Belt produced by Force Group based in South Africa.
Images of electric-shock belts promoted by: Force Group (left)18,
Beka International (centre)19 and Filcotech ApS (right).20
If the shock delivered by the belts that have been promoted for sale by Filcotech ApS and
Beka International exceed 10,000 volts, as appears likely, then these devices would fall into
Annex II of the Regulation and thus the import or export of such items would be prohibited.
In response to correspondence from Amnesty International and Omega, the CEO of Filotech
stated that the range of electroshock stun technology was introduced in 2011 and is now
under review. He further stated that Filcotech does not market [any electroshock stun
equipment] at all in Europe and have not moved any units in or out of EU nor of course
Denmark. Filcotech has not sold any stun technology equipment to any country and does not
produce any stun apparatuses.21
7/31/2019 Torture Tools European Union
11/50
11
Following enquiries by Amnesty International and Omega, correspondence dated 16th January
2012 was received from the Danish Enterprise and Construction Authority stating that we
can inform you that the Danish authorities until now have not received any applications or
issued any licences since the Regulation came into force. Furthermore the DanishBusiness Authority has initiated an investigation based on your enquiry, which will include a
written consultation of Filcotech ApS.22
A letter from the Danish Business Authority was received by Omega dated 10 May 2012. The
letter stated that the investigation and written consultation of Filcotech ApS had been
concluded. This investigation included an unannounced inspection visit of Filcotechs
premises. The letter states that: The result of the investigation carried out is that no illegal
import or export of the electric-shock devises [sic] in general nor the specific product High
Voltage Security Transit Belt by Filcotech ApS could be verified to have taken place.
Furthermore, no technical assistance or brokering services by the company in relation to
these products has been confirmed and no stock was found at Filcotech. Even so, it seems
that Filcotech ApS still markets the High Voltage Security Transit Belt on their webpage.
Accordingly, the Danish Business Authority has requested Filcotech ApS to remove the
marketing of the product from the website.23
Filcotech have subsequently removed all reference to the High Voltage Security Transit
Belts from their website. Following correspondence from Amnesty International and Omega,
a representative of Beka International explained that: although the product is on our web
site, we did not sell one part of this product range and we would never have sold to European
Union countries. We do not even have a sample.He further stated that: Due to import and
export regulations we will not sell any part in the future as well and within the next revision of
our web site we will take it off.24
According to a representative of the GermanFederal Office of Economics and Export Control(BAFA) BAFA considers body-worn electric shock devices that can deliver shocks with a
voltage of more than 10.000 V to torture a person to be controlled under 2.1 of Annex II of
the Council regulation (EC) 1236/2005 (last amended by Council regulation (EC)
1352/2011) regardless of their form or design. They are thus subject to the import and
export prohibition constituted in Articles 3 and 4 of the regulation.Furthermore For body-
worn electric shock devices BAFA has not issued any export or brokering licences since
30.07.2006.25
In response to questions about Beka Internationals promotion of the anti scape stun belt,the representative stated that: A substantiated decision whether a particular good is listed in
the annexes needs concrete technical data though.26
7/31/2019 Torture Tools European Union
12/50
12
Given concerns about the potential use of body worn electric-shock devices for torture and ill-
treatment,Amnesty International and Omega recommend that the German and Danish
Governments, as well as ensuring there is no trade in such devices, should consider
prohibiting all promotion and marketing of such devices and confirm that no such devices are
held by German or Danish companies. If any electric-shock belts are found they should be
verifiably destroyed as soon as possible.
(ii)Imports of electric-shock beltsHungaryIn 2005, (prior to the introduction of the Regulation) the Hungarian government informed the
Council of Europe's Committee for the Prevention of Torture (CPT) that 50,000 volt electric-
shock belts were to be introduced in all Hungarian prisons and police establishments by the
end of 2005, alongside electric stun batons.27
The Hungarian Government stated in 2006
that the electric stun batons referred to in the CPTs report had not been used, but
provided no further information about the use of the electric-shock belts.28
Amnesty International and Omega raised this specific case in the From Words to Deeds
report and have called on the Hungarian Government to provide information as to whether the
electric-shock belts were still in use; whether any technical assistance, training or any
technical manuals had been imported; and if so, when such transfers occurred.29
On 17th June 2010, in its Resolution on the Regulation, the European Parliament:
Strongly condemn[ed] any attempts by Member States or companies within the European
Union to import electric-shock stun belts whose import is prohibited by Council Regulation
(EC) No 1236/2005, or other electric-shock body-worn restraint devices essentially similar in
effect, although legal, and urge[d] the Commission to conduct an urgent investigation to
establish whether and when electric-shock stun belts or related parts, other electric-shock
body-worn restraint devices, technical assistance or training have been transferred to any
Member States prior to, or since, the introduction of the Regulation, to determine whether
such devices have been deployed by any law enforcement or prison authorities in those
countries and to report its findings to Parliament.30
On 3rd October 2011, Omega received a letter from the Hungarian Trade Licensing Office
which contained a copy of correspondence originally sent to the European Commission
regarding the import of the electric-shock belts, stating that:
As to the application of electric shocking belts objected by Amnesty International and
Omega Research Foundation joint study: From-words to Deeds" we checked the facts
at the Hungarian Prison Service Head Office. (HPSHO). The Head of the Office informed
us that the electric shocking belts have never [been] in use. We also learnt that the
HPSHO has no such kind of goodsimported after the Regulation entered into force.
7/31/2019 Torture Tools European Union
13/50
13
All kits are being detracted into a concentrated controlled stock gradually up to the final
date of 15 November 2010.31
[Emphasis in original text]
Following correspondence from Amnesty International and Omega requesting further
information, the Hungarian Trade Licensing Office confirmed that there had been no import
activity regarding spare parts, technical assistance, training or technical manuals of electro-
shock stun belts.32
Amnesty International and Omega welcome the clarification from the Hungarian Government
that the electric-shock belts have not been utilised, to date. In correspondence dated 23rd
January 2012, the Hungarian Trade Licensing Office informed Amnesty International and
Omega of their communications with the Hungarian Prison Service Head Office (HPSHO) on
this issue. In Hungarydestroying the electric-shock stun belts is legally the duty of the
Hungarian Prison Service Head Office. The Hungarian Prison Service Head Office in their
answerinformed us that they have examined the possibilities of the verifiable destroying of
the devices. According to the Hungarian legislation, in the frame of the public procurement
procedure, the Hungarian Prison Service Head Office is making hard efforts to select the
appropriate company, who has the required licenses to verifiably destroy the devices, and to
raise the financial background to carry it out. Following the closure of this process, the
HPSHO will dispose of the destroying and will inform us about the required information/dates
immediately.33
However, given the concerns raised by the European Parliament, UN Committee Against
Torture, the CPT and human rights organisations regarding these devices, and the continuing
possession of such equipment by the Hungarian authorities, Amnesty International and
Omega strongly recommend that all electric-shock belts be verifiably destroyed by the
Government of Hungary as soon as possible.
2.2 ELECTRIC-SHOCK CUFFS AND OTHER ELECTRIC-SHOCK DEVICES ATTACHED
TO THE HUMAN BODY
The use of any electric-shock device attached to the human body and designed for use on
prisoners or detainees cannot be justified under international law prohibiting torture or other
ill-treatment, and UN standards on the use of force by law enforcement officials, which
require any use of force to be proportional and necessary to the achievement of a legitimate
objective. Even when such electric-shock restraints are worn by humans but not activated,
they may constitute cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment, maintaining prisoners in constant
fear of instant pain for as long as they are worn.
Accordingly, as discussed above, the Regulation prohibits the import or export of electric-
shock belts designed for restraining human beings by the administration of electric shocks
having a no-load voltage exceeding 10,000 volts.34
7/31/2019 Torture Tools European Union
14/50
14
However, certain companies manufacturing such electric-shock belts have also manufactured
other forms of electric-shock restraint devices, based on the same technology, but designed
to be placed on other human limbs or body parts. Until recently, the transfer of electric-shock
cuffs or other electric-shock devices attached to the human body was not prohibited or even
controlled by the Regulation, even though the effects of such devices are essentially similar
to the prohibited electric-shock belts.
Amnesty International and Omega have repeatedly highlighted the Regulations limitations in
this area and recommended that the existing prohibition in the Regulation on electric-shock
belts should be extended to cover electric-shock cuffs and any other electric-shock devices
designed for attachment to the body of a prisoner or detainee. This prohibition should cover
all electric-shock restraint devices regardless of the levels of voltage and power used.
On 20th December 2011, following a formal review of the Regulation, the Commission
declared: It is also necessary to broaden the ban on trade in electric-shock belts to cover
similar body-worn devices such as electric shock sleeves and cuffs which have the same
impact as electric-shock belts.35
Consequently, Annex II of the Regulation has been amended, as follows:
2.1 Electric-shock devices which are intended to be worn on the body by a restrained
individual, such as belts, sleeves and cuffs, designed for restraining human beings by the
administration of electric shocks having a no-load voltage exceeding 10,000
V[olts][Emphasis added]36
Amnesty International and Omega welcome these developments and call on the Commissionand EU Member States to ensure that they are fully implemented throughout the European
Union. Stringent implementation by all Member States in this area is vital given the reported
cases of possession or promotion of such devices by European companies.
RomaniaThe REACT/Band-It system produced by Stinger Systems Inc. (now Karbon Arms Inc.) in the
USA, delivers repeated eight-second shocks at 50,000 volts at a rising intensity during the
eight seconds.37
Activated by a remote control device from up to 175 feet away, the shock
can be repeated at will after a one-second delay.38
Originally designed to be placed over the
left kidney area, the device can now be worn on eight places on the human body, including
limbs.
39
In April 2010, the IPS news agency reported
40
that Gate 4 Business, a Romaniandistributor of the American manufacturer, had imported several REACT/Band it devices as
samples, though the company representative stated that he had ceased to be an agent for
Stinger Systems. Following the recent introduction of Commission Implementing Regulation
(EU) No 1352/2011, the trade in all electric-shock device[s] intended to be worn on the
body by a restrained individual (including the REACT/Band-it device) is prohibited.
7/31/2019 Torture Tools European Union
15/50
15
In response to correspondence from Amnesty International and Omega, a representative of
Gate 4 Business srl stated that: we imported 2 samples of stun guns without cartridges, but
not the [Band-it] devices...The representative also stated that in 2008-09 Gate 4 Business
sent correspondence to the former Stinger company informing them that Gate 4 no longerwanted to be distributors of Stinger products in Romania.
41
Given the contradictory information available concerning possible import of sample Band-it
devices, Amnesty International and Omega recommend that the Romanian Government
should investigate this case to determine whether such devices were in fact imported and if
so confirm the location of all such electric-shock devices and ensure that they are verifiably
destroyed as soon as possible.
Germany
A German company PKI Electronic Intelligence GmbH42
has marketed an extensive range of
security and surveillance products including a range of electric-shock equipment. Of
particular concern are its Stun-Cuffs for Foot, Stun-Cuffs for Handwhich, as of 26th June
2012, were still being displayed on its website (see below)43
. According to the company
product catalogue, the electric-shock cuffs can be remotely activated and deliver a 60,000
volt shock to the prisoner.
Electric-shock Stun-Cuffs promoted by PKI Electronic Intelligence GmbH.44
With the introduction of Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 1352/2011 the trade
in electric-shock cuffs is now prohibited. Following enquires by Amnesty International and
Omega, a representative from PKI Electronic Intelligence GmbH has stated that the company
has never sold PKI 9355 / PKI 9360 [stun-cuffs].45
Although the PKI representative also
7/31/2019 Torture Tools European Union
16/50
16
stated that we have deleted electric shock batons from our product range and replaced
[them with] non electric devices46
, the company has given no indication of whether it
produced stun cuffs, nor detailed the number of devices it currently possesses (if any) nor
provided any details of whether it will continue to promote such devices.
In correspondence with Amnesty International and Omega, the German Federal Office of
Economics and Export Control (BAFA) stated that they considered body-worn electric shock
devices that delivered electric shocks greater than 10.000 V to be controlled under the
Regulation, with their import and export prohibited. They confirmed that no brokering or
export licences had been granted for such equipment.47
In response to questions about the electric-shock stun-cuffs promoted by PKI, the BAFA
representative replied A substantiated decision whether a particular good is listed in the
annexes needs concrete technical data though.48
Given concerns about the potential use of such devices for torture and ill-treatment, Amnesty
International and Omega recommend that the German Government, as well as ensuring there
is no trade in such devices, should confirm the location of any such devices in Germany and
verifiably destroy them as soon as possible.
SpainIn 2010 Amnesty International and the Omega Research Foundation published the report
From Words to Deeds: making the EU ban on the trade in tools of torture a reality. This
report highlighted the promotion in 2008by a Spanish company, Nidec Defense Group
(Nidec), of electric shock stun cuffs manufactured by a US based company.. Following a
telephone interview with Amnesty International in December 2008 all reference to the stuncuffs was removed from the Nidec website.
49
It subsequently appears that NIDEC has again marketed body-worn electric-shock devices.
The company is listed as a distributor for the US based company Karbon Arms.50
As
previously mentioned Karbon Arms has manufactured the Band-It electric shock system.51
.
In June 2012 the Nidec website displayed the full range of Karbon Arms products including
the Band-It system which is now prohibited by the Regulation.52
Following correspondencesent to the company by Amnesty International and Omega this reference was subsequently
removed53.
Given concerns about the potential use of body worn electric-shock devices for torture and ill-treatment,Amnesty International and Omega recommend that the Spanish Government
should ensure there is no trade in such devices, and also prohibit all promotion of such
devices and confirm that no such devices are held by Spanish companies. If any electric-
shock devices are found they should be verifiably destroyed as soon as possible.
7/31/2019 Torture Tools European Union
17/50
17
Screenshot of the Band-It system taken from the catalogue advertised through the Nidec website
http://www.nidec.es/descargas/Karboncatalogo.pdf ( 20th April 2012)
2.3 SPIKED BATONS AND SPIKED SHIELDS
Specially manufactured spiked batons sometimes referred to as sting sticks54
are mass-
produced and exported by a number of policing equipment manufacturers in East Asia. Such
weapons are typically metal batons with pointed ends and metal spikes running down the
shaft. In the hands of law enforcement officials, these weapons have no practical use otherthan to inflict torture or other ill-treatment. They are considered to be specially designed
implements of tortureby the United States Bureau of Industry and Security with a
presumption of denial on their trade.55
Omega and Amnesty International have not identified
any EU companies currently producing or trading in this equipment.
However, Omega and Amnesty International have discovered evidence indicating that non-EU
companies have promoted spiked batons and shields in Europe. For example, researchers
attending the Eurosatory 2010 defence exhibition, held in Paris from 14th to18th June 2010,
discovered marketing material produced by Hainan Xinxing Import and Export Company
Ltd/Wuhan Xinxing Import and Export Trading Company Ltd (Factory) which clearly promoted
spiked batons (see below left).
In addition, another Chinese company promoting its equipment at Eurosatory 2010, the
company Poly Technologies, was found to be advertising a riot shield which appeared to have
metal spikes on the shields face (see below right).
7/31/2019 Torture Tools European Union
18/50
18
Images of Hainan Xinxing Import and Export Company Ltd/Wuhan Xinxing Import and Export Trading Company Ltd (Factory) spiked
baton and Poly Technologies, spiked shield, taken from promotional material distributed by the companies at Eurosatory 2010.
One EU Member State, the UK, has previously taken action to prohibit spiked batons from
being exported, traded or brokered by any UK person since April 2008.56
Amnesty International and Omega regard the use of spiked batons, spiked shields and other
spiked devices as inconsistent with UN standards on the use of force by law enforcement
officials that require any use of force by such officials to be proportional and necessary to the
achievement of a legitimate objective. The use of such devices would be unsuitable for any
legitimate law enforcement function and almost certainly result in unwarranted injuries and
ill-treatment.
On 16th November 2011, in their presentation to the Committee on Common Rules for
Exports of Products, Amnesty International and Omega called on the Commission and EU
Member States to add all such devices to Annex II of the Regulation, and ensure their importand export is prohibited so as to prevent their international trade from contributing to torture
and other ill-treatment.
On 20th December 2011, following a formal review of the Regulation, the Commission
declared: It is necessary to prohibit trade in spiked batons which are not admissible for law
enforcement. While the spikes are capable of causing significant pain or suffering, spiked
batons do not appear more effective for riot control or self-protection than ordinary batons
and the pain or suffering caused by the spikes is therefore cruel and not strictly necessary for
the purpose of riot control or self-protection.57
Consequently, Annex II of the Regulation has been amended to include:
Batons or truncheons made of metal or other material having a shaft with metal spikes.58
Amnesty International and Omega welcome these developments and call on the Commission
and EU Member States to ensure that they are fully implemented throughout the European
7/31/2019 Torture Tools European Union
19/50
19
Union. Furthermore, the two organisations believe that the prohibition should not be
restricted to spiked batons but should be extended to include all spiked devices including
spiked shields.
In addition the Regulation should be amended to prohibit the promotion and marketing of
goods in Annex II. All such goods held by companies should be verifiably destroyed.
2.4 THUMB-CUFFS, FINGER-CUFFS AND THUMB-SCREWS
Thumb-cuffs are restraint devices shaped broadly like handcuffs, but designed for use on
detainees or prisoners thumbs. Various types of thumb cuffs are currently commercially
marketed, including fixed thumb-cuffs, which feature only a bar of metal with holes for
thumbs; as well as thumb-cuffs connected by chains. Thumb-cuffs are widely marketed by
law enforcement and security equipment distributors in the European Union,(see images
below)59
as well as by non-EU companies in Europe.
For example, materials promoting thumb-cuffs were distributed by one Chinese company at
Eurosatory 2010 (see page 17) and by two Chinese companies at Milipol 2011 (see page
24). In addition, at least two (non-EU) companies manufacture finger-cuffs, which have four
restraint holes for fingers, rather than for thumbs.60
Images of thumbcuffs: taken from the brochures of Buchner Grosshandel and Haller Stahlwaren.61.
Currently the EC Regulation controls but does not prohibit the import and export of thumb-
cuffs.62However, the practical utility of thumb-cuffs for legitimate law enforcement purposes
is unproven, while their propensity for use in stress positions amounting to torture and
7/31/2019 Torture Tools European Union
20/50
20
other ill-treatment is evident.Several EU countries have already instituted national export
prohibitions on thumb-cuffs, including Hungary63
and the UK.64
Thumb-screws are specially designed instruments of torture for compressing the thumb by a
screw to inflict unnecessary pain, amounting to ill-treatment.65 Their use was reported in
2010 by the UN Special Rapporteur on Torture66
. As with thumb-cuffs, certain EU States
have banned the trade in such devices.67
However, Article 1.3 of the Regulation Annex III contains thumbscrews among the items
that should merely be subjected to trade controls rather than prohibited. Unlike thumb-cuffs,
thumbscrews do not appear to be widely traded, and Omega and Amnesty International have
not identified any EU companies currently manufacturing or trading them. Nonetheless it
remains anomalous that the Regulation only requires trade controls but does not actually
prohibit the export of thumbscrews, which are clearly an instrument with no practical use
other than for torture or other ill-treatment. In this regard it should be noted that the United
States Bureau of Industry and Security classifies thumbscrews, thumb-cuffs and finger-cuffs
to be specially designed implements of torture, with a presumption of denial on their
trade.68
Amnesty International and Omega recommend that thumb or finger restraints purposely
designed to cause discomfort or pain such as those with serrated edges be added to the
list of prohibited items (Annex II). In addition thumbscrews should be reclassified under
the Regulation from the list of controlled items (Annex III) to the list of prohibited items
(Annex II) to prevent their international trade from contributing to torture and other ill-
treatment.
We also recommend that EU Member States ensure that other forms of thumb and finger
restraint are not exported to end-users where there are reasonable grounds to assume that
such items might be used in torture or other ill-treatment. To ensure that such risk
assessments are rigorous, Member States should update and share information on the misuse
of restraints for torture and other ill-treatment by prospective end-users.
2. 5 LEG IRONS, CHAINS AND SHACKLES
Rule 33 of the UN Standard Minimum Rules for the Treatment of Prisoners states that
[i]nstruments of restraint, such as handcuffs, chains, irons and strait-jackets, shall never be
applied as a punishment. Furthermore, chains or irons shall not be used as restraints.69
Article 68.1 of the European Prison Rules reiterates this prohibition.70
In the light of these prohibitions and because of concerns about the use of leg irons, leg
cuffs and gang chains constituting ill-treatment, some EU countries, including the UK and
7/31/2019 Torture Tools European Union
21/50
21
Spain, have already banned the export of such items (and also, in the case of the UK, the
marketing and brokering of such items).71
However, despite the UN Standard Minimum
Rules proscription on the use of irons and chains as restraints, the EC Regulation does not
yet prohibit the import and export of fixed leg irons and bar fetters for security and law
enforcement purposes, and leg restraints purposely designed to cause discomfort, such as
weighted leg cuffs. Instead the Regulation merely includes leg-irons, gang-chains, shackles
and individual cuffs or shackle bracelets in Annex III as controlled but licensable items i.e.
that could be traded.
Leg restraints of various kinds are widely marketed by law enforcement and security
equipment distributors in the European Union,72
as well as by non-EU companies in Europe.
For example, the Chinese company, Hainan Xinxing Import and Export Company Ltd/Wuhan
Xinxing Import and Export Trading Company Ltd (Factory) distributed materials promoting leg
irons (as well as thumb-cuffs) at Eurosatory 2010.
Images taken from Hainan Xinxing Import and Export Company Ltd/Wuhan Xinxing Import and Export Trading Company Ltd
(Factory) brochure, distributed at Eurosatory 2010.
Leg Irons
Thumb Cuffs
7/31/2019 Torture Tools European Union
22/50
22
Furthermore on 19th October 2011, Amnesty International and Omega obtained evidence of
two further Chinese companies Jiangsu Anhua Police Equipment Manufacturing Co and
Tianjin Myway International Trading Co. Ltd., distributing promotional material advertising
metal leg fetters, at Milipol 2011. (See Section 5 on trade fairs and exhibitions, for more
information).
Amnesty International and Omega therefore recommend that fixed leg irons and bar fetters
for security and law enforcement purposes as well as leg restraints purposely designed to
cause discomfort, such as weighted leg cuffs - should be reclassified under the Regulation
from the list of controlled items (Annex III) to the list of prohibited items (Annex II) to
prevent their international trade from contributing to torture and other ill-treatment.
We also recommend that EU Member States ensure that other forms of leg restraint such as
chain-linked leg cuffs are not exported to end-users where there are reasonable grounds that
such items might be used in torture or other ill-treatment. To ensure that such risk
assessments are rigorous, Member States should update and share information on the misuseof such leg cuffs in acts of torture and other ill-treatment by prospective end-users.
2.6 RESTRAINT CHAIRS
Restraint chairs usually consist of a metal framed chair into which prisoners are strapped at
the arms and the legs, with a strap across the chest. Since the late 1990s, Amnesty
International has consistently highlighted its concerns about such devices, documenting
cases in which people have been strapped into the chairs as punishment, or have been left
immobilized in them for prolonged periods without adequate safeguards, in violation of
international standards.73
In 2000, the United Nations Committee against Torture recommended, that the USA
Abolish restraint chairs as methods of restraining those in custody. Their use almost
invariably leads to breaches of article 16 of the Convention[the prohibition against cruel,
inhuman or degrading treatment].74
Despite this recommendation, restraint chairs have
continued to be used in the United States. In 2006, Amnesty International reported that at
least 18 people have died in US detention facilities after being immobilized in four-point
restraint chairs, including several people who had also been pepper-sprayed and shocked
with stun weapons.75
In 2009, Amnesty International documented how detainees on hunger strike in Guantananmo
Bay were alleged to have been subjected to cell extractions, force-feeding and the use of
restraint chairs in ways which have amounted to excessive force and violations of the
prohibition of torture and other ill-treatment.76
In 2010, Amnesty International reported how a seriously ill prisoner on death row in Georgia
was detained in a restraint chair. Brandon Rhode was scheduled to be executed on 21st
September 2010. However on that morning he attempted suicide by making deep cuts in
both arms and his neck with a razor blade. He was rushed to hospital where he was assessed
as being in immediate danger of losing his life, having lost half his blood. He was revived,
7/31/2019 Torture Tools European Union
23/50
23
stitched up, and brought back to prison. His lawyer saw him there on the afternoon of 21st
September, held in a restraint chair, in which Brandon Rhode was in severe pain and
discomfort, his face haggard, pallid and jaundiced. He was subsequently executed six
days later on 27th September 2010.77
Omega and Amnesty International have not identified any EU companies currently producing
or trading in restraint chairs. Nonetheless at present the Regulation does not prevent an EU
company from doing so.
Omega and Amnesty International have discovered evidence indicating that non-EU
companies are promoting restraint chairs in Europe. Researchers attending the Milipol 2011
exhibition, held in Paris from 18th -21st October 2011, discovered marketing material
produced by two Chinese companies, Milylink International and Jiangsu Anhua PoliceEquipment Manufacturing Co. which clearly promoted restraint chairs.
Artist's sketch of Brandon Rhode strapped into restraint chair as
witnessed by his lawyer on afternoon of Rhode's suicide attempt on 21st
September 2010. Brian Stelfreeze. Amnesty International, USA: Cruel,
inhuman, degrading: 40th execution of the year approaches, AMR
51/091/2010, 24th September 2010
Left: Restraint chair, image from Milylink International brochure. Right: Inquest chair, image from
Jiangsu Anhua Police Equipment Manufacturing Company, Co. Ltd brochure. Both companies
marketing materials displayed at Milipol 2011.
7/31/2019 Torture Tools European Union
24/50
24
Amnesty International and Omega believe that the use of restraint chairs on those persons
held in places of custody are easily open to serious abuse and we recommend consideration
be given to listing restraint chairs in Annex II of the Regulation, so that their import and
export to all countries is prohibited.
2.7 PHARMACEUTICAL CHEMICALS USED IN CAPITAL PUNISHMENT
Lethal injection is the most common method of execution in the US. All but two of the 46
people executed by the US in 2010 were executed using this method.78
Lethal injection is
also provided for as a method of execution in China79
, Guatemala80
, Taiwan81
, Thailand82
,
and Vietnam83
.
On 26th October 2010, Jeffery Landrigan was executed by lethal injection for the 1989
murder of Chester Dean Dyer in Phoenix, Arizona, United States. The execution took place
despite a US-wide shortage of sodium thiopental, the anaesthetic agent in the three-drug
cocktail used in lethal injections in Arizona. The Arizona Attorney-General revealed that the
sodium thiopental used to execute Landrigan was imported from the United Kingdom.84
On 16th December 2010, in Oklahoma State Penitentiary, John David Duty became the first
prisoner to be executed with a mixture of drugs that included pentobarbital.85 Subsequently,
as US stocks of sodium thiopental declined, a growing number of US States replaced this
drug with pentobarbital in their lethal injections. According to statistics produced by the
Death Penalty Information Centre there have been 36 executions carried out in 2011 using
lethal injections in the USA of which seven involved sodium thiopental and the other 29
involved pentobarbital.86
On 29th November 2010, the UK Secretary of State for Business Innovation and Skills made
a statement87
to the High Court of Justice indicating that the UK Department for Business
Innovation and Skills would issue an order under s. 6 of the Export Control Act 2002 (ECA)
controlling the export of sodium thiopental to the US. Under this order, any person exporting
sodium thiopental from the UK to the US requires an export license issued by the UK Export
Control Organisation. Whilst decisions to issue an export license are made on a case-by-case
basis, there is an assumption that export licenses for sodium thiopental would be refused by
the Export Control Organisation where there is evidence or a risk of the drug being used in
lethal injections. Breach of the order will be a criminal offence. Furthermore, incorrespondence dated 12th April 2011 with the UK based anti-torture and anti-death penalty
organisation, Reprieve, the UK Business Minister announced that the UK Government
intended to introduce further controls to regulate the export of pancuronium bromide,
potassium chloride and sodium pentobarbital to the United States.88
7/31/2019 Torture Tools European Union
25/50
25
The UKs action though welcome - did not prevent other European manufacturers from
potentially exporting these and other drugs that may be used in lethal injections, directly or
through an intermediary to the United States or other countries where execution by lethal
injection is practised. In 2010 and 2011 a number of European companies including those
in Austria89
, Denmark90
, Germany91
, Italy92 and the UK93 were identified as manufacturing or
trading in pharmaceutical drugs that could be employed in lethal injections.
Amnesty International and Omega believe the Regulation provides the most appropriate
means for EU-wide control of the export of such chemicals. The Regulation explicitly bans
the export of types of equipment that have no practical useother than for the purpose of
capital punishmentor for the purpose of torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading
treatment or punishment, irrespective of the origin of such equipment.94
Annex II of the
Regulation provides a distinct list of prohibited items, and includes, inter alia,goods
designed for the execution of human beings, such as gallows, guillotines, electric chairs, gas
chambers and the automatic drug injection systems for the purpose of execution of human
beings by the administration of a lethal chemical substance.
However, until recently, sodium thiopental and other drugs currently used in lethal injections
such as pancuronium bromide and pentobarbital, were neither prohibited items (under Annex
II of the Regulation), nor controlled items (under Annex III of the Regulation).
Amnesty International and Omega have raised these issues in correspondence and during
meetings with relevant officials in the EU, proposing that the European Commission and
Member States extend the scope of the Regulation to include sodium thiopental,
pancuronium bromide and pentobarbital, in its Annex III. Furthermore the organisations
recommended that the Commission and Member States introduce a catch-all safeguard
provision (see below) which would address the export of other lethal injection drugs, therebysubjecting these drugs to the export control systems of their respective Member States. Such
measures would ensure that any future exports of such drugs would not be used for capital
punishment, but only for legitimate medical purposes.
On 6th October 2011, 168 MEPs had signed a Written Declaration on the export of drugs
used for the death penalty in third countries which called: on the Commission to
immediately place on Annex III of Council Regulation (EC) No 1236/2005 drugs, including
but not limited to Sodium Thiopental and Pentobarbital, that are sourced in the EU and that
can be used in executions in third countries.95
On 20th December 2011, following a formal review of the Regulation, the Commission
declared:
In some recent cases medicinal products exported to third countries have been diverted
and used for capital punishment, notably by administering a lethal overdose by means of
injection. The Union disapproves of capital punishment in all circumstances and works
7/31/2019 Torture Tools European Union
26/50
26
towards its universal abolition. The exporters objected to their involuntary association with
such use of the products they developed for medical use.
It is therefore necessary to supplement the list of goods subject to trade restrictions to
prevent the use of certain medicinal products for capital punishment and to ensure that all
Union exporters of medicinal products are subject to uniform conditions in this regard. Therelevant medicinal products were developed for inter alia anaesthesia and sedation and their
export should therefore not be made subject to a complete prohibition.96
Consequently, Annex III of the Regulation has been amended to include a new category of
controlled items:Products which could be used for the execution of human beings by means
of lethal injection, as follows:
Short and intermediate acting barbiturate anaesthetic agents including, but not limited to:
(a) amobarbital (CAS RN 57-43-2
(b) amobarbital sodium salt (CAS RN 64-43-7)
(c) pentobarbital (CAS RN 76-74-4)
(d) pentobarbital sodium salt (CAS 57-33-0)
(e) secobarbital (CAS RN 76-73-3
(f) secobarbital sodium salt (CAS RN 309-43-3)
(g) thiopental (CAS RN 76-75-5)
(h) thiopental sodium salt (CAS RN 71-73-8), also known as thiopentone sodium97
A further explanatory note states that
This item also controls products containing one of the anaesthetic agents listed under short
or intermediate acting barbiturate anaesthetic agents.98
Amnesty International and Omega welcome these developments and call on the Commission
and EU Member States to ensure that they are fully implemented throughout the European
Union. However these additions to Annex III of the Regulation have not included other
chemicals such as propofol and pancuronium bromide, both of which are utilised in lethal
injections. Amnesty International and Omega consequently recommend that such chemicals
be added to Annex III so that their trade and transfer are controlled by EU Member States
without delay. Furthermore, given the danger that States employing lethal injection for
capital punishment may in future utilise other pharmaceutical chemicals not currently listed
in Annex III, we strongly recommend that the Commission and EU Member States introduce
a torture and death penalty end use catch all safety clause.
Although the Commissions amendment was introduced solely to halt the transfer of
barbiturate anaesthetic agents intended for lethal injection in capital punishment, these
and other pharmaceutical drugs could also be utilised in other cruel, inhuman and degrading
treatment or punishment, including in the forced interrogation of prisoners. The transfer of
anaesthetic or other pharmaceutical drugs intended for such practices would be contrary to
7/31/2019 Torture Tools European Union
27/50
27
the purpose of the EC Regulation.
Consequently, Amnesty International and Omega recommend that the Commission and EU
Member States introduce the following amendment to the description of the drugs listed in
Annex III: Products which could be used for the execution of human beings by means of
lethal injection, or which could be employed in torture or cruel, inhuman or degrading
treatment or punishment.
3. INTRODUCTION OF A TORTURE
AND DEATH PENALTY END USE CATCH
ALL SAFETY CLAUSELike many trade control systems, the Regulation is list-based and contains categories of
specifically named items whose international trade by EU Member States is either prohibited
or subjected to trade controls. List-based systems provide clarity for exporters and importers,
but they can also have unintended, inherent weaknesses, including:
Not controlling a range of products even though they fall within the intended scope of the
agreement, because they are not specifically named on the control lists.
The delay experienced from the time manufacturers and other suppliers, market and transfer
newly designed equipment, and evidence emerges of the ways such equipment is
contributing to serious violations of international standards, to the time taken for authoritiesto add such equipment to a control list.
The potential for suppliers to evade controls simply by re-naming or re-specifying their
products.
These weaknesses appear to be exemplified in the Regulations failure to adequately control
export of pharmaceutical drugs utilised in capital punishment. Had a catch all safety
clause been in existence, immediate steps could have been taken by Member States to
control the transfer of these drugs to a particular unscrupulous end user so as to ensure that
they were not used for imposing the death penalty.
Amnesty International and Omega are concerned that the control regime will always be
reacting belatedly to new technological and market developments so that in practice
regulation is carried out in slow motion.
7/31/2019 Torture Tools European Union
28/50
28
This problem has been recognised in some respects, for instance by the United States
Bureau of Industry and Security (BIS). In its 2010 review of Crime Control License
Requirements, the BIS revised of its category ECCN 0A983 to read:
Specially designed implements of torture, includingthumbscrews, thumbcuffs, fingercuffs,
spiked batons, and parts and accessories, n.e.s.99
In its commentary on the Revisions, the BIS explained that the addition of the word
includingwas intended to make clear that the items listed are examples of specially
designed implements of torture rather than an exclusive list of such implements.100
Amnesty International and Omega urge the European Commission and Member States to add
a torture and death penalty end-use catch-all clause to the Regulation. This would allow
Governments to prohibit the trade of any items not listed in the Annexes that clearly have no
practical use other than for the purposes of capital punishment, torture and other ill-
treatment, or where there are reasonable grounds to believe that such items would be used
for the purposes of capital punishment, torture and other ill-treatment.
4. CONTROLS ON BROKERING
ACTIVITIES
The EC Regulation does not at present control brokering activities by companies or
individuals within the EU concerning the transfer of items between third countries outside
the EU, where the items will not enter the EU customs territory. Such brokering activities
could involve either the trade of items listed in Annex II (prohibited goods) or other items
where their transfer is known to be intended for capital punishment, torture and other ill-
treatment in third countries.
Amnesty International and Omega are concerned that without a requirement in the
Regulation for Member States to control the brokering of items covered by the Regulation,
and given the existing lack of brokering trade controls in some EU Member States, the
European Unions efforts to ban the international trade in "torture equipment" beyond
Europe, and to control the EU trade in other security and law-enforcement equipment to
prevent that trade from contributing to torture and other ill-treatment, will be undermined.Whilst action at the EU level has not been forthcoming, some Member States have
implemented national controls over the marketing and brokering of items covered by the
Regulation.
7/31/2019 Torture Tools European Union
29/50
29
United KingdomThe United Kingdom classifies all electric-shock devices as Category A goods and thus
assigns the highest levels of controls, i.e. a de facto ban, on all activities connected with the
trade in such equipment. The Review of Export Control Legislation (2007) Supplementary
Guidance Note on Trade (Trafficking and Brokering) in Controlled Goods states that;
For category A goods a trade licence is required for any of the following activities,where
undertaken by any company or person from within the UK (whether or not theyare a UK
person) or by any UK person operating overseas and whether directly or indirectly:
Supplying or delivering, agreeing to supply or deliver, or doing any act calculated to promote
the supply or delivery of Category A goods where that person knows or has reason to believe
that their action or actions will, or may, result in the removal of those goods from one third
country to another.
Unlike trading in category C and B goods, there are no exemptions for those whose sole
involvement is in transportation services, financing or financial services, insurance orreinsurance services or general advertising and promotion (such as displaying category A
goods at trade fairs or advertising them in periodicals). Therefore, anyone involved in the
provision of these services requires a licence.
These strict controls reflect the fact that the supply of many of these goods is inherently
undesirable. Licences will not normally be granted for any trade in paramilitary goods listed
because of evidence of their use in torture101
Amnesty International and Omega commend the UK for the introduction of this proactive
legislation. Because this legislation prohibits a broad range of activities associated with theprovision of Category A Goods, concerns about UK companies potentially advertising and
promoting electric-shock equipment can be investigated.
Omega has found that a UK based company AFS Security Systems (AFS) has promoted a
range of security products and services.The company website stated that; AFS Security are
pleased to announce that we have further expanded our operations in West Africa in co-
operation with Koasen Nigeria Ltd, to supply Specialist Security Equipment and Services,
especially for the Police, Military, and Traffic sectors of the Nigerian market102
The AFS website provided details of the range of products marketed by Koasen Nigeria Ltd
including Karbon Arms electric-shock devices (see below)103
7/31/2019 Torture Tools European Union
30/50
30
AFS Security Systems, http://www.afs-securitysystems.com/Karbon-Arms.php (Last accessed 17th October 2011). This has
subsequently been removed.
In March 2010 the following information was given on the Latest News section of the AFS
website: AFS Security in association with our partner company Koasen Nigeria Ltd are
pleased to announce an agreement is in place to supply Stinger Systems range of products in
Nigeria, including S-200AT Stun Gun, Ice Shield - Electronic Immobilisation Riot Shield,
andBand-It - Prisoner Transport and Courtroom Control System,104
more details can be
found on www.koasen.com.105[Emphasis added]
Amnesty International and Omega have sought further information about this case from AFS
Security and the UK Government. Whilst no response has yet been received from the
company, a representative of Her Majestys Revenue and Customs (HMRC) has acknowledgedour correspondence and stated that the issue is being examined by HMRC.
106
Amnesty International and Omega recommend that the EC Regulation should be amended so
that all EU Member States are required to control the brokering activities by companies and
individuals within the EU who act to bring buyers and sellers together and arrange
transactions for the transfer of items listed in the Regulation, particularly between third
countries. Thus, EU Member States should:
Prohibit brokering activities by any natural or legal person within the EU involving
international transactions for the transfer from any place, including sales and exports, ofitems with no practical use other than for capital punishment, torture or other ill-treatment,
as included in Annex II of the Regulation;
Introduce effective mechanisms to control brokering activities by any natural or legal person
within the EU involving international transactions for the transfer from any place, including
sales and exports, of items listed in Annex III.
7/31/2019 Torture Tools European Union
31/50
31
Such controls should include instances where: (i) the brokering activity is conducted outside
the EU by registered companies, nationals and permanent residents of EU Member States,
and (ii) where the items are being brokered by a legal or natural person within the EU, but
the items do not physically enter the EU.
5.PROMOTION OF REGULATION
EQUIPMENT AT EU TRADE FAIRS AND
EXHIBITIONS
The following three cases illustrate where equipment currently banned under the Regulation,
or equipment which has no purpose other than for torture or other ill treatment, was
promoted at European international trade events by both EU and non-EU companies. Omega
and Amnesty International are concerned that such promotional activities undermine the
spirit of the Regulation and can facilitate the import, export or brokering of equipment
prohibited under the Regulation.
Eurosatory 2010
The Swiss company SECFOR attended the Eurosatory 2010 exhibition107
in Paris held on
14th-18th June 2010. The literature on the SECFOR stand advertised a number of
electroshock devices including an, anti scape stun belt. The belt is visually similar to the
anti scape stun belt produced by the Force Group company in South Africa which delivers
a 50,000 volt shock.108 A representative from the Swiss Federal Department of Economic
Affairs, State Secretariat for Economic Affairs (SECO) has confirmed that the Swiss
authorities are looking into the case, as well as the respective legal basis.109
A
representative of SECFOR has stated that: to date, we have not bought and/or sold any of
the electroshock equipment to which you refera former employee of ours, was the sole
liaison with that particular business/company and [he] no longer has ties to Secfor.The
company representative further stated that: Secfor has ceased its relationship with the
manufacturer and stopped the promotion of these products immediately. Accordingly, we
have removed any and all reference to these products from our website.110
7/31/2019 Torture Tools European Union
32/50
32
Images of an electroshock rifle baton, shock riot shields and anti scape stun belt taken from SECFOR promotional material
distributed at Eurosatory 2010
DSEi 2011The Defence and Security Equipment International exhibition was held in London from the
13 16th September 2011.111
Amnesty International and Omega uncovered evidence that a
UK based firm, Beechwood Equipment Ltd,112 was marketing equipment prohibited under
UK export control legislation. The equipment included: gang chains, leg cuffs and systems
such as the, Enhanced Transport Restraint Systemsthat combine waist chains and cuffs
with leg-cuffs.
When Amnesty International raised this case with the event organiser, they closed the stall
and expelled the company. Although Amnesty International and Omega welcome the speedy
action taken by the event organiser to terminate the companys activities, we are concerned
about the effectiveness of the compliance checks carried out by the DSEi organiser to ensure
that no company promotes or trades any equipment prohibited by the Regulation or by UK
law.
7/31/2019 Torture Tools European Union
33/50
33
Milipol Paris 2011The Milipol 2011 worldwide exhibition of internal State security was held from 18th 21st
October 2011 in Paris.113
Amnesty International and Omega uncovered evidence that two
companies based in China, Milylink International Co.Ltd and Jiangsu Anhua Police
Equipment Manufacturing Co., were distributing marketing literature that promotes restraint
chairs, spiked batons and thumb-cuffs. In addition, material distributed by three Chinese
companies, Jiangsu Anhua Police Equipment Manufacturing Co, China XingXing, and Tianjin
Myway International Trading Co. Ltd., was also found to be advertising metal leg fetters.
In response to correspondence from Amnesty International and Omega, Jiangsu Anhua Police
Equipment Manufacturing Co. confirmed that the company manufactures a wide range of
security equipment including handcuffs and batons and has business in Europe[an]countries, such [as] France, UK, Spain, Finland, Greek, Italy, Albania etc.However the
company representative did not provide information on the specific equipment transferred or
the end users of such equipment.114
A representative from Mily Link International, in
correspondence to Amnesty International, stated that his company had never sold spiked
batons, thumb-cuffs and restraint chairs to any European countries. And we will not sell
these productions to any parties, as these are old styles and not available any more.115
Amnesty International and Omega wrote to the French Government raising concerns and
requesting further information regarding the promotion and possible trading of the equipment
identified above.
Images of a variety of leg restraints taken
from promotional material distributed by
Beechwood Equipment Ltd at DSEI 2011.
7/31/2019 Torture Tools European Union
34/50
34
Images of leg fetters: taken from promotional material distributed by (left) Tianjin MyWay and (centre) China XingXing at Milipol
2011. Leg fetters (right) displayed on Jiangsu Anhua Police Equipment Manufacturing Co stall at Milipol 2011.
A representative from the Omega Research Foundation met with French Customs officials in
June 2012 to discuss the implementation of the Regulation and the promotion of the
equipment identified above. The French Customs officials stated that the Regulation does
not control the promotion of equipment, and that any changes to prohibit promotion of Annex
II goods would have to be agreed by an inter-ministerial decision.116
Although the Regulation specifically prohibits the import and export of equipment listed in
Annex II and it requires Member States to control transfers of other equipment listed in
Annex III, there are currently no restrictions on the commercial marketing of such items
which could be used for torture or other ill-treatment. Member States should extend the
Regulations coverage to prohibit the commercial marketing and promotion at least of all
Annex II items and also require companies and individuals to obtain prior authorisation to
market any equipment listed under Annex III.
Amnesty international and Omega recommend that Member States should ensure that all
companies promoting security equipment are made aware of the Regulation and their
obligations under this legislation. Member States should ensure that all military, security or
police trade fairs and marketing events conducted in their country do not promote the import,
export or brokering of items prohibited under the Regulation. Organisers of such events
should be strongly encouraged to undertake a thorough screening of all potential exhibitors to
assess the likelihood that that they will trade in or promote equipment prohibited by the
Regulation so where the potential exhibitor poses a substantial risk of engaging in such
activities the exhibitor should be denied permission to participate.
7/31/2019 Torture Tools European Union
35/50
35
6.REPORTING ON LICENSING
ACTIVITY
Article 13 (3) of the Regulation requires that, Member States, if possible in cooperation
with the Commission, shall make a public, annual activity report, providing information on
the number of applications received, on the goods and countries concerned by these
applications and on the decisions they have taken on these decisions... However, in our
previous report, From Words to Deeds Amnesty International and Omega found that only
seven States - Bulgaria, Czech Republic, Germany, Lithuania, Slovenia, Spain and the United
Kingdom - had produced one or more publicly available annual activity reports since 2006.
A recent review of Member State transparency and reporting measures by Amnesty
International and Omega indicates that only three new EU Member States Hungary, Ireland
and Sweden - have made their licensing information publicly available. In addition, a fourth
State Estonia - provides some information on related control activity. Below are details of
the Annual Reports publicly available.
7/31/2019 Torture Tools European Union
36/50
36
Member State No of
Publicly
Available
Reports
since 2006
Latest Reporting Period
Covered
Location of Annual Reports
Bulgaria 3 2010-2011 http://www.exportcontrol.bg/docs/Godishen_doklad_Regula
tion_1236_2010.pdf
Czech Republic 1 2008-2009 http://www.mpo.cz/dokument54368.html
The Czech Republic has yet to update the relevant
webpage with the data for the 2010 reporting year. The
previous annual reporting statistics do not appear to be
archived online.
Estonia 4 2008-2009 The annual activity report compiled by the Strategic
Goods Commission and published on the website of theMinistry of Foreign Affairs lists the number of
prosecutions brought in the reporting year for potential
breaches of import and export control legislation. The
2009 report references the ..illegal importing or
exporting of electroshock goods.The annual activity
reports can be found here:
http://www.vm.ee/?q=en/node/5039
Germany 4 2010-2011 http://www.bafa.de/ausfuhrkontrolle/de/arbeitshilfen/sonsti
ges/vierter_taetigkeitsbericht.pdf
Hungary 2 2009-2010 http://mkeh.gov.hu/haditechnika/haditechnika-
kulkereskedelem/6a Jelentese
Ireland 1 2008-2010 Ireland does not appear to publish an annual report
specifically for equipment controlled under the
Regulation. On Wednesday 21st September 2011 Ireland
published the First Report under the Control of Exports
Act 2008.117
The Report makes specific reference to
equipment controlled under the Regulation. The report
covers the period 2008-2010 and states that, The
Department has never
received an import/export application under the Torture
Regulation118
Lithuania NA NA In advance of the 2010 Words to Deeds Report TheMinistry of Interior, Republic of Lithuania provided
Amnesty International and Omega with information on the
Regulation published in the Official Gazette (Lithuania)
No 32 91) 2008 as well as the licensing data provided to
the Commission. We have yet to receive any subsequent
data regarding licensing activity for Regulation controlled
goods.
Slovenia 3 2010-2011 www.mg.gov.si/fileadmin/mg.gov.si/pageuploads
Spain 4 2010-2011 http://www.mityc.es/en-
US/IndicadoresyEstadisticas/Paginas/Estadisticas.aspx
Sweden 6 2010-2011 http://www.kommers.se/Startsida-verksamhetsomraden/Handelsamnen/Importlicenser/Begra
nsning-av-handel-med-varor-for-tortyr-mm/
United Kingdom 4 2010-2011 https://www.exportcontroldb.berr.gov.uk/eng/fox/sdb/SDBH
OME
7/31/2019 Torture Tools European Union
37/50
37
The following 16 States do not appear to have produced any public annual activity reports at
the time of writing: Austria, Belgium, Cyprus, Denmark, Finland, France, Greece, Italy,Latvia, Luxembourg, Malta, Netherlands, Poland, Portugal, Romania and the Slovak
Republic.
Amnesty international and Omega have written to all 16 States requesting information
regarding their annual reporting procedures and asking for details of any reports they may
have produced. To date, we have received responses from five Member States. Poland119
,
Cyprus120
and Latvia121
informed Amnesty International and Omega that they have, to date,
granted no licences for equipment covered by the Regulation and consequently have not
produced an Annual Report. Italy informed Amnesty International and Omega that it does not
publish an annual report on licensing activity or produce licensing statistics but data
concerning activity is made available for relevant Italian departments, the EuropeanCommission and international export control regimes.
122France has informed Omega that it
has not produced any activity reports as there has been no licensing activity.123
The French
Government finally published an official decree in 2011 which completed the
implementation of the Regulation in France. The Decree specifies that the competent
authority in France with responsibility for the Regulation is the Minister for Customs; it
details powers for repealing, suspending or quashing licences and for passing information to
other member states on licence refusals.
The lack of public reporting contrary to the purpose of the Regulation is of great concern to
Amnesty International and Omega as it limits parliamentary and public oversight of the
implementation of the Regulation and it may be indicative of a lack of effective regulation bythe Government in question to prevent the trade in equipment that could be used in torture
and other ill-treatment. Concern is increased in those countries where full public reporting
has been delayed or has not occurred at all, but where there is evidence of companies which
are found to be marketing equipment that falls under or should fall under the Regulation.
Case Study: Delayed reporting and the marketing of controlled
equipment in Ireland
Although the Regulation came into force in 2006, the Irish Government did not release any
public annual reports, as required under Article 13 of the Regulation, untilSeptember 2011.
On the 21st
September it published its first report on the operation of the Control of ExportsAct 2008124 This report covers the period 2008 to 2010 and makes specific reference to the
Regulation. The report states that no applications for either the import or export of Regulation
controlled equipment have ever been received by the Department of Jobs, Enterprise and
Innovation. Amnesty International and Omega welcome this report but have sought further
information about the activities of two companies, based in the Republic of Ireland, that have
offered equipment for sale that is controlled by the Regulation.
7/31/2019 Torture Tools European Union
38/50
38
Torch Security, based in County Kildare, has promoted riot-control vehicles and hand held
electroshock stun devices including the Taser S26. The company website stated that the
TS26 advanced Taser gun was for EXPORT ONLY. 125 A second Irish company, KFT Solar
& Security Equipment, has marketed a range of armoured vehicles, and policing equipmentincluding stun batons and projectile fired electroshock weapons.126
The electroshock devices promoted by these companies are Annex III items and a licence
would therefore be required for their export or import.127 Amnesty International and Omega
have requested that the Irish Government to investigate the activities of Torch Security and
KFT Solar to establish whether any transfers of Regulation controlled equipment have taken
place. Amnesty International and Omega have written to both companies seeking further
information about their activities in this area. In response a representative of KFT Solar has
stated that the company has neither traded nor sold/transferred (or facilitated the transfer
of) any form of electroshock equipment into or out of Ireland. In addition, please note that it
has neither brokered (nor otherwise facilitated) the transfer of any form of electroshock
equipment to third parties within or outside of Ireland.The representative further stated that
Stun guns which could be classified as electroshock equipment are not on our active
product listing.128
We urge all Member States that have not done so to compile public annual activity reports inaccordance with their Article 13(3) obligations. They should send a copy of their reports to
the European Commission and make them publicly available. These reports should at a
minimum include: the number of applications received, the items involved and countries of
destination for each application, as well as the decisions made on each of these applications.
A selection of electroshock devices marketed by Torch Security. Special Reference is made to the Taser
device which was only available for export.
7/31/2019 Torture Tools European Union
39/50
39
We recommend that all Member States annual activity reports, compiled in accordance with
their Article 13(3) obligations, should be updated and form part of a formal Regulation
review process undertaken by the Committee on Common Rules for Exports of Products, as
empowered by Article 15 and 16 of the Regulation.
To facilitate the compilation and completion of annual activity reports by all Member States
and to ensure their consistency, we recommend that the European Commissio